Evaluating the ORSIM® simulator for assessment of anaesthetists' skills in flexible bronchoscopy: aspects of validity and reliability.

BACKGROUND: Developing expertise in flexible bronchoscopy is limited by inadequate opportunities to train on difficult airways. The new ORSIM bronchoscopy simulator aims to address this by creating virtual patients with difficult airways. This study aims to provide evidence on the validity and reliability of the ORSIM for assessment of subjects on both normal and abnormal airway simulations. METHODS: Novice, trainee, and expert subjects performed seven simulations of varying difficulty and scored the perceived difficulty for each. Time to completion was measured. Three blinded raters independently scored videos of each subject's performance. We measured inter-rater agreement and the difference in raters' scores between subject groups. RESULTS: We recruited 28 study subjects, generating 196 videos for analysis. Expert subjects consistently completed the scenarios faster than novices. Overall performance scores showed significant differences between subject groups (P<0.0001). Inter-rater reliability of scores was >0.8. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide initial evidence on the validity and reliability of the ORSIM bronchoscopy simulator, supporting its potential value in training and assessment.

Airway management equipment in a metropolitan region: an audit.

Difficult airway equipment containers are commonly found in operating rooms, but the availability of airway equipment beyond that environment is unknown. Using the Difficult Airway Society (U.K.) and American Society of Anesthesiologists' guidelines, we conducted an inspection audit of airway equipment at all anaesthetic sites in our region. Staff knowledge about the equipment was assessed and feedback was provided to each site. Eighteen of the 42 sites had an airway container Equipment for an unexpected difficult intubation, according to the guidelines, was deficient at all sites. Equipment to detect oesophageal intubation was inadequate. Locations remote from the operating suite lacked emergency invasive airway equipment and were, on average, a 4.3 minute walk from the nearest appropriate equipment. Two clinics had no emergency invasive airway equipment. Half of the airway containers with check lists had items missing. One third of the items with an expiry date were expired. Quality control and implementation of airway guidelines could rectify these deficiencies. Anaesthesia organisations should be encouraged to publish detailed equipment guidelines.